IOC insiders that BBC Sport spoke to at the luxury resort of Costa Navarino in Greece, where Thursday’s vote took place, all said that Coventry was the preferred candidate of outgoing president Thomas Bach.

The German denied suggestions that he had been directly lobbying on her behalf, and insisted that the process had been fair.

On Friday, he said he was “very much relieved” to see the result of the vote, calling it “a demonstration of the IOC as a global organisation with the highest good governance standards”.

Whatever the reality, Coventry’s success has been widely portrayed as a win for continuity and patronage at the IOC, and for her long-time mentor Bach, and evidence of his influence over an organisation he has ruled since 2013, and with its membership – most of which he has appointed.

The result will also intensify scrutiny of the IOC’s secretive and highly restrictive election process.

The exclusive organisation – made up of royals, heads of state, former athletes and figures from business and politics – seems resistant to the change that candidates like Coe stood for.

The double Olympic champion was the reform candidate, but his pledge to shake up the IOC clearly did not appeal to many.

At World Athletics, Coe had taken a tougher stance than the IOC on Russian doping and gender eligibility, and introduced the idea of cash for gold medals at Paris 2024, a move that antagonised Bach.

The rules require the IOC hierarchy to remain neutral in any presidential election.

Coe was magnanimous in the immediate aftermath of defeat, but it was telling perhaps that when I asked him if it had been a fair fight, he simply answered, “Oh, it’s an election.”